Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

205 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,210 Delhi1,160 Bangalore450 Kolkata442 Chennai440 Pune437 Ahmedabad349 Hyderabad217 Jaipur205 Raipur137 Chandigarh109 Surat99 Indore96 Amritsar86 Visakhapatnam84 Cuttack55 Cochin53 Nagpur41 Rajkot39 Lucknow37 Allahabad26 Jodhpur25 Agra25 Karnataka20 Guwahati13 SC10 Patna9 Varanasi7 Ranchi7 Dehradun6 Calcutta5 Telangana3 Jabalpur2 Punjab & Haryana2 Panaji2 Kerala2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income86 Section 143(3)80 Disallowance53 Section 145(3)38 Section 26336 Section 40A(3)34 Section 35A26 Section 25025 Section 4025 Deduction

WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CEIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 394/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, CIT &

disallowance can be made by applying the provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) as there is no question of diversion

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS OM METALS SPML INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD), JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 431/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 205 · Page 1 of 11

...

23

Section 143(1)22

ITAT Jaipur

22 May 2023

AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, CIT &

Section 92C

disallowance can be made by applying the provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) as there is no question of diversion

MOTHERS EDUCATION HUB,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 618/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 4Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

section 40A(2)(b), we noticed that for making any disallowance under this section, the AO is under obligation to determine

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 980/JPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2020AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 40A(3)

2 RC 539; [2004] 3 SCC 640. 32. The legal proposition that arises from the above decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court is that the consequences, which were to befall on account of non-observation of sub-section (3) of section 40A must have 35 M/s Vijayeta Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT nexus to the failure of such

A DAGA ROYAL ARTS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1065/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 May 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A)For Respondent: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT)

disallowance u/s 40A(3) by virtue of Rule 6DD(j). 3.12 The above Rule 6DD(j) was omitted w.e.f. 25.07.1995 vide IT(Fourteenth Amdt.) Rules, 1995. Thereafter, Rule 6DD was amended many a times. 3.13 The above series of events and related amendments is tabulated as under: Particulars W.e.f Introduction of section 40A(3) 1.4.1968 Introduction of Rule

LALITA KUMARI,ANTA DISTRICT BARAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Kabra (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 44A

disallowance u/s 40A(2)(a) is not applicable to persons not covered u/s 40A(2)(b). The persons covered,when the assessee is an individual as in the present case, under section

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

In the result, revenue’s ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 698/JPR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowed under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. ITA No. ITA No. 698-JP-14, 738-JP-14, 699-JP-14, 739-JP-14, 435-JP-16, 298-JP-16, 345-JP-2017, 296-JP-17 M/s Bansal

M/S MORANI CARS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-6, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 184/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Suhani Maharwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl.CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40ASection 40aSection 68

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) ? Answer was in affirmative. I have also gone through the submissions of the appellant, however I find no force in its contention. I am of view of that the appellant had diverted interest bearing funds in giving interest free advances. In view of the provision of section 40A(2)(b

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 502/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal and Shri Gulshan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT - DR

Section 142Section 144Section 153A

b) Travelling expenses Rs. 51,896/-. 3. Disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 6,83,29,399 4. Disallowance u/s 40 (a) (ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961 6,99,228 5. Addition u/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of 70,00,000 alleged bogus share capital introduced through Kolkata based companies 6. Disallowance

M/S SKYWAYS TOWNSHIP PVT LTD. 1/2 LIC FLATS, VIDYADHAR NAGAR, SECTOR-6, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 250/JPR/2019[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2015-2016

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Section 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs. 42,00,000/- U/s 40A(3) of the Act.” 3 ITA No. 250/JP/2019 & 2 Ors. M/s Skyways Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT Grounds of ITA No. 251/JP/2019 A.Y. 2015-16. “ 1. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in making and confirming addition of Rs. 64,96,001/- u/s 2

SMT. MANJU GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 251/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Section 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs. 42,00,000/- U/s 40A(3) of the Act.” 3 ITA No. 250/JP/2019 & 2 Ors. M/s Skyways Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT Grounds of ITA No. 251/JP/2019 A.Y. 2015-16. “ 1. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in making and confirming addition of Rs. 64,96,001/- u/s 2

M/S SKYWAYS TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 824/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Section 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs. 42,00,000/- U/s 40A(3) of the Act.” 3 ITA No. 250/JP/2019 & 2 Ors. M/s Skyways Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT Grounds of ITA No. 251/JP/2019 A.Y. 2015-16. “ 1. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in making and confirming addition of Rs. 64,96,001/- u/s 2

G.D. MINERALS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, disallowance of supervision charges of Rs

ITA 13/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Raj Mehra (JCIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

section 40A(2)(b) was excessive or any comparable instances in respect of fair market value of interest are cited, no disallowance

OCEAN EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LTD,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 37/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prabha Rana (Adv.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, Section 40 (which too starts with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause 18 Ocean Exim India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO and spells

NIMBUS PIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 384/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Badaya (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.S. Meel (JCIT)

Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, Section 40 (which too starts with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 436/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, Section 40 (which too starts with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 435/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, Section 40 (which too starts with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 437/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, Section 40 (which too starts with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible

APM INDUSTRIES LTD,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 203/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 203/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 APM Industries Ltd. SP-147, Industrial Area Bhiwadi, Alwar cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-01, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 5114 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a l

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. PoddarFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 263Section 40Section 40A(7)

b) and clause (a) of section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment order is set aside to be made afresh in the light of the observation made in this order. The AO is required to make necessary verification in respect of the observations made in this order after allowing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.” 5. Feeling dissatisfied

SUPERSONIC TURNERS PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 276/JPR/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Feb 2017AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Prithivi Raj Meena (Add. CIT)

disallowable under Section 40A(2)(b) irrespective of disclosure of such income by the recipient. Therefore appellant’s argument is not justified